On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 14:55:10 +0100 David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> wrote: >David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> writes: <some snippage> >Question: is there a reason that you are going with buffer sizes of >3*2^n rather than 2^n? I've not actually tried what Jamulus does in >that situation (but will do) but it seems a bit strange to me. Does it >have some inherent advantage? This puzzled me too. I was under the impression that the reason for using powers of 2 was that buffering code was more efficient. Presumably that would give the best latency figures. -- Will J Godfrey http://www.musically.me.uk Say you have a poem and I have a tune. Exchange them and we can both have a poem, a tune, and a song. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
